Agenda item

Andrew McMurtrie addressed the Committee on this item. He stated that he was encouraged by the Nature Improvement Plan and asked if the council would commit to cutting grass and hedges less often and less comprehensively to provide more habitat and food for animals and insects. He acknowledged that areas adjacent to pathways and play areas needed to be kept under control but felt that contractors often cut back further than necessary.

In response, Councillor Learney acknowledged the conflicting priorities in managing hedgerows and advised that the council was reviewing its requirements with contractors to allow for more flexibility. Rick Smith, Service Lead: Sustainability and Natural Environment added that this review was ongoing and aimed to balance biodiversity benefits with operational practicalities.

A supplementary agenda containing a revision to Table 2 – Condition of SSSIs within the Winchester District in 2025 of the draft plan was circulated prior to the meeting.  A copy of this can be viewed on the councils website here.

Councillor Learney, Cabinet Member for the Climate and Nature Emergency introduced the report and outlined the following points:

1.       The Nature Improvement Plan was a draft document, and the          committee’s comments were sought, particularly on the five pathways, principles, and measures.

2.       The plan would supersede the current Biodiversity Action Plan (2021-        2026), reflecting significant changes in the national context, including   the 2021 Environment Act and the new Local Nature Recovery     Strategy.

3.       The council had declared a nature emergency, and this plan represented a move from an activity-based model to one with clear    aims, objectives, and targets to restore nature and reduce pollution.

In addition, Zoe Goldsmith, Principal Ecologist/Biodiversity Officer, emphasised the following matters:

1.         The plan set out a strategic approach to nature improvement across          the entire district, building on the existing Biodiversity Action Plan.

2.         The aim was to achieve nature improvement through five key          pathways: protecting and managing land for nature; creating new       spaces for nature; delivering nature-based solutions; preventing     pollution; and connecting people to nature.

3.         Numerical measures had been developed for the five-year period to          track progress on both council-owned land and across the wider       district, supported by annual action plans.

4.         A set of key principles was also included to provide clarity on the     council's standards where numerical targets were not applicable, for    example, on the use of chemicals.

The Policy Committee was asked to note and comment on the Draft Nature Improvement Plan 2025-2030, specifically in relation to the proposed:

a)       Five Pathways
b)       Principles
c)       Measures

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the report. In summary, the following matters were raised.

(i)         A question was asked whether using only Sites of Special Scientific           Interest (SSSIs) and Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation   (SINCs) as a proxy for land managed for nature was sufficient for the    district-wide target, given other large-scale private nature recovery schemes existed.

(ii)        Clarification was sought on how the plan aligned with the South Downs     National Park’s own partnership management plan.

(iii)     A question was asked for clarification on whether the 27.6% figure for        council land managed for nature was based on the total district area, including the National Park.

(iv)     Further detail was requested on the baseline for the plan's measures,        the ambition for 2030, and how progress would be measured         incrementally each year.

(v)       A suggestion was made to include clearer, simpler explanations for           technical terms such as 'biodiversity units' to make the document more    accessible to the public.

(vi)     A question was asked if the council was using data from farming grants     for tree and hedge planting to help build a comprehensive picture of   nature improvement across the district.

(vii)         A question was raised regarding the council's role and responsibility for     collating data on private nature schemes versus signposting to                   government-held data.

(viii)       It was asked if the strategy could be expanded to include a focus on          engaging residents to improve nature in their own gardens and on private land.

(ix)     A question was asked whether the document could explain the        limitations of setting targets to avoid creating unwanted incentives and to acknowledge that some positive outcomes take longer to measure.

(x)       Regarding the data tables, a query was raised about using    percentages of the total district area more consistently to provide better       context.

(xi)     Clarification was sought on how a designation like a Special Area of          Conservation (SAC) could be quantified in terms of land area within the           plan's measures.

(xii)         A question was asked if links to the annual ecological survey reports                    could be included to better demonstrate the outcomes of the council's      work.

(xiii)       A query was raised about the accuracy of the number of SSSIs and           SACs listed in the document, with a suggestion that the figures          appeared low.

(xiv)       A question was asked whether any opportunities for wetland creation        existed, particularly in relation to wastewater treatment works.

(xv)        Clarification was sought on the target to plant 500 metres of hedgerows, and why no specific action was planned for the 2025-26   period.

(xvi)       A question was asked if the maps in the document could be improved        and if active links could be provided to the data for each designated site.

(xvii)      Regarding the list of completed actions, a question was asked what the     outcomes of these actions were, rather than just noting their     completion.

(xviii)    A question was raised about the need to strengthen the language   around the document's parameters, to clarify its purpose and prevent        its policies from being misinterpreted in other contexts, such as         planning.

The points raised were responded to by the Cabinet Member, the Service Lead: Sustainability and Natural Environment and the Principal Ecologist/Biodiversity Officer accordingly.

          RESOLVED:

1.    That the Draft Nature Improvement Plan 2025-2030 be noted;

2.    That the comments of the committee, as summarised above, be noted by the Cabinet Member for discussion when finalising the plan; and

3.    That the updated draft Nature Improvement Plan be circulated to committee members for further comment prior to its submission to Cabinet.